Airlines given permission to fly over North Pole for the first time..
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Altrincham
Age: 58
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airlines given permission to fly over North Pole for the first time..
Long-haul flight times reduced by up to 50%.
'Whole new world opened up,' says Branson.
By RAY MASSEY and ARTHUR MARTIN
Last updated at 1:20 AM on 26th December 2011
Comments (210)
Share
Many long-haul flight times will be dramatically reduced as planes are allowed to take a short cut over the North Pole.
Changes in aviation rules, which apply to twin-engine jets such as a Boeing 777, will mean passengers can reach exotic destinations without making a stop.
During the flights passengers will be treated to stunning views of the Arctic.
Shorter flights: A British Airways Boeing 777 which will be able to take a 'short cut' over the North pole.
The decision to allow the flights, dubbed Santa’s short cut, is likely to cut flight prices, open up new destinations and reduce emissions.
Until now, regulators have insisted the jets must always be within three hours of a suitable place to land.
More...
Christmas reveller mowed down and killed in front of his wife after hit and run driver jumps red light.
Balmy Christmas Day! Britain will be milder than Barcelona and Athens on December 25 with temperatures of up to 14C.
This is because the failure of one engine on such a plane is potentially far more serious than for one with three or four.
However, due to safety improvements the jets can now be five-and-a-half hours from a suitable landing spot. Travellers boarding flights from London will be able to fly non-stop to Fiji in 18 hours.
Previously, they faced a 24-hour journey via Los Angeles or Seoul.
FLIGHTS FROM LONDON
Fiji (10,000 miles) - current time via Los Angles or Seoul: 24 hours.
New time: 18 hours non-stop using 'polar express' short cut.
Tahiti (9,600 miles) via Los Angeles: 23 hours.
New time: 17 hours.
Honolulu (7,300 miles) via Los Angeles: 18 hours.
New time: 13 hours.
Anchorage (4,500 miles) via Seattle: 16 hours.
New time: 8 hours's short cut' - over the North Pole to destinations such as Hawaii, Alaska or French Polynesia.
The changes mean that other routes which have not been flown before can be used.
This will reduce the flight time to Anchorage in Alaska from 16 hours to eight because pilots will no longer have to fly via Seattle.
As a result, Boeing 777 and 787 ‘Dreamliner’ jets will be able to fly almost anywhere in the world.
Sir Richard Branson, president of Virgin Atlantic, said of the ruling by the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration: ‘This development really does open up a whole new world.
‘Apart from the stunning destinations on arrival, the Arctic scenery will be just amazing.
'Our new fleet of 787s could well be flying to Honolulu or even Fiji one day.’
As well as the North Pole, many trans-Pacific journeys have hitherto been out-of-bounds for twin-engine planes.
Jets with more than two engines have been allowed to fly over the North Pole for some years.
The first airline to take advantage of the ‘extended operations’ option for twin engines is Air New Zealand which earlier this month flew from Los Angeles to Auckland.
Chief pilot Captain David Morgan said: ‘What this means is that the aeroplane is able to fly a straighter route between pairs of cities, and that’s good for the environment.
Frozen: An aerial view of the Arctic which passenger carriers will now be able to fly over to exotic destinations.
‘Less fuel is burned and less carbon dioxide is emitted into the atmosphere. It’s also good for customers because flights are potentially shorter.’
But not everyone in aviation is happy with the changes.
While it is generally accepted that dual engine failure is extremely unlikely, some safety experts expressed concern about cabin conditions during a diversion.
One safety manager, who wished to remain anonymous, said: ‘It’s all very well being able to make a safe landing, but passengers are likely to be distraught and extremely cold after a five-hour diversion to an airstrip in the Arctic.’
A spokesman for the British Airline Pilots’ Association said: ‘Our members are confident that the safety case for equipment redundancy, pilot training and passenger welfare will be fully satisfied.’
Planes flew over the North Pole during the Cold War in the 1950s to avoid Communist Bloc airspace.
Read more: Mind the sleigh! Airlines given permission to fly over North Pole for the first time slashing the hours to exotic destinations | Mail Online
'Whole new world opened up,' says Branson.
By RAY MASSEY and ARTHUR MARTIN
Last updated at 1:20 AM on 26th December 2011
Comments (210)
Share
Many long-haul flight times will be dramatically reduced as planes are allowed to take a short cut over the North Pole.
Changes in aviation rules, which apply to twin-engine jets such as a Boeing 777, will mean passengers can reach exotic destinations without making a stop.
During the flights passengers will be treated to stunning views of the Arctic.
Shorter flights: A British Airways Boeing 777 which will be able to take a 'short cut' over the North pole.
The decision to allow the flights, dubbed Santa’s short cut, is likely to cut flight prices, open up new destinations and reduce emissions.
Until now, regulators have insisted the jets must always be within three hours of a suitable place to land.
More...
Christmas reveller mowed down and killed in front of his wife after hit and run driver jumps red light.
Balmy Christmas Day! Britain will be milder than Barcelona and Athens on December 25 with temperatures of up to 14C.
This is because the failure of one engine on such a plane is potentially far more serious than for one with three or four.
However, due to safety improvements the jets can now be five-and-a-half hours from a suitable landing spot. Travellers boarding flights from London will be able to fly non-stop to Fiji in 18 hours.
Previously, they faced a 24-hour journey via Los Angeles or Seoul.
FLIGHTS FROM LONDON
Fiji (10,000 miles) - current time via Los Angles or Seoul: 24 hours.
New time: 18 hours non-stop using 'polar express' short cut.
Tahiti (9,600 miles) via Los Angeles: 23 hours.
New time: 17 hours.
Honolulu (7,300 miles) via Los Angeles: 18 hours.
New time: 13 hours.
Anchorage (4,500 miles) via Seattle: 16 hours.
New time: 8 hours's short cut' - over the North Pole to destinations such as Hawaii, Alaska or French Polynesia.
The changes mean that other routes which have not been flown before can be used.
This will reduce the flight time to Anchorage in Alaska from 16 hours to eight because pilots will no longer have to fly via Seattle.
As a result, Boeing 777 and 787 ‘Dreamliner’ jets will be able to fly almost anywhere in the world.
Sir Richard Branson, president of Virgin Atlantic, said of the ruling by the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration: ‘This development really does open up a whole new world.
‘Apart from the stunning destinations on arrival, the Arctic scenery will be just amazing.
'Our new fleet of 787s could well be flying to Honolulu or even Fiji one day.’
As well as the North Pole, many trans-Pacific journeys have hitherto been out-of-bounds for twin-engine planes.
Jets with more than two engines have been allowed to fly over the North Pole for some years.
The first airline to take advantage of the ‘extended operations’ option for twin engines is Air New Zealand which earlier this month flew from Los Angeles to Auckland.
Chief pilot Captain David Morgan said: ‘What this means is that the aeroplane is able to fly a straighter route between pairs of cities, and that’s good for the environment.
Frozen: An aerial view of the Arctic which passenger carriers will now be able to fly over to exotic destinations.
‘Less fuel is burned and less carbon dioxide is emitted into the atmosphere. It’s also good for customers because flights are potentially shorter.’
But not everyone in aviation is happy with the changes.
While it is generally accepted that dual engine failure is extremely unlikely, some safety experts expressed concern about cabin conditions during a diversion.
One safety manager, who wished to remain anonymous, said: ‘It’s all very well being able to make a safe landing, but passengers are likely to be distraught and extremely cold after a five-hour diversion to an airstrip in the Arctic.’
A spokesman for the British Airline Pilots’ Association said: ‘Our members are confident that the safety case for equipment redundancy, pilot training and passenger welfare will be fully satisfied.’
Planes flew over the North Pole during the Cold War in the 1950s to avoid Communist Bloc airspace.
Read more: Mind the sleigh! Airlines given permission to fly over North Pole for the first time slashing the hours to exotic destinations | Mail Online
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: newcastle
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought so..........
For the past few weeks now aircraft bound for west coast USA & Canada on flightradar24 have been heading virtually due north up England between Hexham andHaltwhistle then past Edinburgh on a northerly heading. BA, Virgin etc never seen this far east previously.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: North of Watford
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Am I missing something here?
I flew on a JAL 747 non-stop London to Anchorage in 1991 within 500 miles of the North Pole (according to the flight crew) in about 8 hours on the way to Tokyo.
Oh yes, silly me! It had 4 engines....................
I flew on a JAL 747 non-stop London to Anchorage in 1991 within 500 miles of the North Pole (according to the flight crew) in about 8 hours on the way to Tokyo.
Oh yes, silly me! It had 4 engines....................
Last edited by Invicta DC4; 26th Dec 2011 at 20:48. Reason: spelling mistook
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: North East
Age: 37
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh yes, silly me! It had 4 engines....................
Ultimately whilst it will be a handy shortcut for the relatively few flights that necessitate the usage of this route, the relatively small, sparsely populated part of the world that it will serve will mean that not many flights will be popping over Santa very soon.
Ah yes Anchorage what a place. 'Land of the midnight sun' To me it was one of the best slips on the BA network back in the 70's. Five days there followed by two days in Japan, then five more days on the return home. Best US allowances at that time. Japanese passengers were a dream to look after. Party all hours. Fall out of a bar at 3am in summer, come face to face with a moose in the middle of the road (not the CSD). Sleep it off in Tokyo/Osaka ready for the party on the way back. What more could you want? Oh yes 2 Christmas Days and @ New Year's Eves because of the time changes if you were lucky.
A great place for skiing as well if any tour operators are interested. ETOPS 757's maybe?
A great place for skiing as well if any tour operators are interested. ETOPS 757's maybe?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: MCT
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the past few weeks now aircraft bound for west coast USA & Canada on flightradar24 have been heading virtually due north up England between Hexham andHaltwhistle then past Edinburgh on a northerly heading. BA, Virgin etc never seen this far east previously.
Suzeman
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 1,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Five and a half hours from a diversion airport.
Is this pushing the limit ? Although I'm sure it is perfectly safe in terms of engine capability but what about an unexpected pressurisation problem and the resulting additional fuel burn when flying so far at low level ?
Would any LH pilot care to comment.
Is this pushing the limit ? Although I'm sure it is perfectly safe in terms of engine capability but what about an unexpected pressurisation problem and the resulting additional fuel burn when flying so far at low level ?
Would any LH pilot care to comment.
We flew the 'Polar route' in BOAC on the 707. I still remember the special kit that was loaded in the cabin including orange polar suits, one for each crew member but none for the passengers!
I am not sure about all this old tosh about opening up new routes and as for Branson flying to Fiji I hope he can find some customers!
We flew to Fiji in the early 70's on VC10 via New York, Los Angeles and Honolulu on route to Oz.
Still remember dodging the falling Coconuts around the pool at the Mocombo Hotel and getting worse for wear at the Police club down the road.
I am not sure about all this old tosh about opening up new routes and as for Branson flying to Fiji I hope he can find some customers!
We flew to Fiji in the early 70's on VC10 via New York, Los Angeles and Honolulu on route to Oz.
Still remember dodging the falling Coconuts around the pool at the Mocombo Hotel and getting worse for wear at the Police club down the road.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As others have said, this seems to offer limited possibilities for UK routes as the places that are literally on the other side of the world from here are generally sparsely populated or have limited demand - Perhaps you might get a US airline doing LHR-HNL or occaisional charters, but I think that's about it.
However, maybe there are more possibilities for new routes or fuel/time savings for traffic between other regions like the US/Canada-ME/India?
However, maybe there are more possibilities for new routes or fuel/time savings for traffic between other regions like the US/Canada-ME/India?
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Coventry
Age: 48
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So 4 engines for long haul is well and truly dead & buried then!
I saw this in the Indy on xmas eve, and just thought it was the most pointless story of the year - as if the paper spends the whole year bashing the industry, only to sneak out a pro-aviation headline when the usual greenies were too pissed on organic mulled whine, far too busy moaning about the over-commercialisation of their originally pagan festival to have time to play let's bash the airlines again.
Much as though I would love to go to Tahiti, Alaska and Hawaii, they are all relatively niche destinations for the UK traveller. The environmental arguments about these flights are also tenuous anyway, as payloads would be restricted, so they'd end up selling more premium seats at knock-down prices. Maybe this would be a 'trip of a lifetime' for many, but yields would still be far below business routes like NYC or NRT.
If I did decide to go to Tahiti, I'd probably go from Paris to avoid the whopping premium long haul APD these flights would attract, so there'd still be a needless short hop in the equation.
With regards to ETOPS in general, how many times have these limits actually been tested? Most incidents I can think of involving twin engines over the Atlantic have been catastrophic failures of systems or crewing, with the number of engines having no relevance to the fatal outcome.
One incident that does spring to mind though is the TS A330 over the Azores, when it ran out of fuel due to a leak. Hyothetically, with 4 engines, the leak in one would be less serious? Thankfully they made it in once piece, but that was a close shave.
I saw this in the Indy on xmas eve, and just thought it was the most pointless story of the year - as if the paper spends the whole year bashing the industry, only to sneak out a pro-aviation headline when the usual greenies were too pissed on organic mulled whine, far too busy moaning about the over-commercialisation of their originally pagan festival to have time to play let's bash the airlines again.
Much as though I would love to go to Tahiti, Alaska and Hawaii, they are all relatively niche destinations for the UK traveller. The environmental arguments about these flights are also tenuous anyway, as payloads would be restricted, so they'd end up selling more premium seats at knock-down prices. Maybe this would be a 'trip of a lifetime' for many, but yields would still be far below business routes like NYC or NRT.
If I did decide to go to Tahiti, I'd probably go from Paris to avoid the whopping premium long haul APD these flights would attract, so there'd still be a needless short hop in the equation.
With regards to ETOPS in general, how many times have these limits actually been tested? Most incidents I can think of involving twin engines over the Atlantic have been catastrophic failures of systems or crewing, with the number of engines having no relevance to the fatal outcome.
One incident that does spring to mind though is the TS A330 over the Azores, when it ran out of fuel due to a leak. Hyothetically, with 4 engines, the leak in one would be less serious? Thankfully they made it in once piece, but that was a close shave.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: derbyshire
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SRB said that this is good news, as he will be able to fly his new fleet of 787s over the North pole.
When is he getting the 787? Is it after the A380 or after he starts Concorde operations?
When is he getting the 787? Is it after the A380 or after he starts Concorde operations?
Paxing All Over The World
Don't forget that one of SRB's jobs is to get free publicity for VS. If he can get their name into the media - he will. I recall a function I attended over 20 years ago, at which he was the guest speaker. He said the only reason that he did all of those adverts for American Express was to get free publicity. MoL does the same, in a slightly different way.
I suggest that criticising someone for doing their job very well is curious. I realise that not everyone likes the man, or what he has achieved, but enough folks buy his products to say that he must be doing something right.
I suggest that criticising someone for doing their job very well is curious. I realise that not everyone likes the man, or what he has achieved, but enough folks buy his products to say that he must be doing something right.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Coventry
Age: 48
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also, could any pilots comment on the optimal range in terms of fuel economy, rather than 'going the distance' for the sake of it?
Very short flight = huge fuel burn on take off and landing = heavy cost of airport fees = more to go wrong re: delays etc.
However:
Very long flight = huge extra quantity of deadweight fuel carried for the sole purpose of burning up later in the flight, therefore fuel burn per pax km rises (exponentially?) with distance, and rises again because of reduced payload.
Therefore - in addition to all the other advantages of having an HQ in DXB, Emirates must be on to quite a good number geographically by operating Europe - DXB - Asia routings, and ditto for EY & QR, with sectors averaging 5-9 hrs. I note that a number of EK kangaroo routes have additional stops on the way when they could go non-stop.
Are Air Tahiti Nui the only airline to currently offer flights from Europe to any of the above named destinations (PPT - no direct routes to ANC or HNL)? Their fleet is 5 x A340-500, and the service runs via LAX - could this operate the route non-stop or is this a stretch too far for the thirsty 345?). AF re-start the route next March. They have a range of other lh aircraft, but afaik, the route will still be via LAX.
So just what is all the fuss about, apart from it being a slow news period (Prince Philip was well at the time the story came out).
Very short flight = huge fuel burn on take off and landing = heavy cost of airport fees = more to go wrong re: delays etc.
However:
Very long flight = huge extra quantity of deadweight fuel carried for the sole purpose of burning up later in the flight, therefore fuel burn per pax km rises (exponentially?) with distance, and rises again because of reduced payload.
Therefore - in addition to all the other advantages of having an HQ in DXB, Emirates must be on to quite a good number geographically by operating Europe - DXB - Asia routings, and ditto for EY & QR, with sectors averaging 5-9 hrs. I note that a number of EK kangaroo routes have additional stops on the way when they could go non-stop.
Are Air Tahiti Nui the only airline to currently offer flights from Europe to any of the above named destinations (PPT - no direct routes to ANC or HNL)? Their fleet is 5 x A340-500, and the service runs via LAX - could this operate the route non-stop or is this a stretch too far for the thirsty 345?). AF re-start the route next March. They have a range of other lh aircraft, but afaik, the route will still be via LAX.
So just what is all the fuss about, apart from it being a slow news period (Prince Philip was well at the time the story came out).
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Coventry
Age: 48
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paxboy,
Except MOL can't do ads for Amex as his airline refuses to take the card, even if they could just charge a £10 fee for the privilege.
I have enourmous respect for both SRB and MOL - far more so than the spoilt child that Stelios has become, especially as SRB & MOL might have had the private education, but they didn't have daddy's billions.
However, I think SRB is exactly as you say - very much a publicity machine, not a technical person. Asked whether his trains would be diesel or electic, he is reputed to have answer 'I don't know' - and why should he have cared, most passengers don't either, except that diesel trains are the rail equivalent of trijets, if you want serious speed or economy, you need the wires!
So in this context, it is legitimate to point out that '4 engines for longhaul' - derided by many at the time as an opportunistic tagline, was well and truly a shorthaul policy, conveniently dropped about a year before the first twinjet order was made.
If he is getting free publicity for what is largely a non-story, then fair play, and even more so for pointing out what there would be to see from the window on such flights, when so many pax are glued to an IFE system which is always going to be inferior to what you can get at home.
He said the only reason that he did all of those adverts for American Express was to get free publicity. MoL does the same, in a slightly different way.
I suggest that criticising someone for doing their job very well is curious. I realise that not everyone likes the man, or what he has achieved
However, I think SRB is exactly as you say - very much a publicity machine, not a technical person. Asked whether his trains would be diesel or electic, he is reputed to have answer 'I don't know' - and why should he have cared, most passengers don't either, except that diesel trains are the rail equivalent of trijets, if you want serious speed or economy, you need the wires!
So in this context, it is legitimate to point out that '4 engines for longhaul' - derided by many at the time as an opportunistic tagline, was well and truly a shorthaul policy, conveniently dropped about a year before the first twinjet order was made.
If he is getting free publicity for what is largely a non-story, then fair play, and even more so for pointing out what there would be to see from the window on such flights, when so many pax are glued to an IFE system which is always going to be inferior to what you can get at home.
